why are voters on the left not noticing what war mongers leftwing politicians have become?

Since when did we support imperialism?

The link to make sense of this is to realise that what is called 'the left' by the corproate media these days is really controlled at the top by the zionists. Communism v's zionism is a false division. Both are controlled at the top by the rothschild cabal

Leftist politicians supporting war in the middle east are working for the zionist enterprise

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

In recent years, an entire literature has sprung up over the various uses of the word "neoliberalism." As many have already pointed out, it is largely used as a term of derision by doctrinaire leftists against both moderate leftists and advocates for free markets.

Those who use the term in a pejorative way (which is nearly everyone) blame neoliberalism for all the world's poverty and inequality. Most of the time, neoliberal simply means "capitalist," although to varying degrees, depending on the pundit. For example, in a new interview with economics writer Steven Pearlstein, neoliberalism is apparently a type of hard-core libertarianism, and nothing less than "a radical free market ideology."

But neoliberalism isn't just held by a mere few eccentrics. Neoliberals include nearly everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders, including Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Theresa May, Rand Paul, and Emmanuel Macron.
We're Neoliberal, and Proud?

Given its sinister undertones, few actually use the term to describe themselves. Nevertheless, there has been an unfortunate trend in recent months in which organizations and writers claiming to support freedom and free-markets have begun self-identifying as "neoliberal."

This likely is borne out of the fact that many who use the term neoliberal are harsh critics of markets. They don't like capitalism, and they'd like to see less of it. They want to see more socialism and more social democracy. And soon.

Given this, some conclude that, if those people hate neoliberalism it can't be a bad thing.

Thus, we see articles like this one, titled "Actually, 'Neoliberalism' Is Awesome" written by a staff member of the free-market Mercatus Center. More famously, there was an article titled "Coming Out as Neoliberals" published by the Adam Smith Institute in which the author, Sam Bowman, encouraged everyone who's more or less in favor of property rights to self-identify as "neoliberal."

Other copycat articles followed, such as one written by Jordan Williams of the New Zealand Taxpayers' Union.

The gist of all of these is this: "Are you a decent human being who supports freedom and opposes tax rates that are too high? Well, my friend, you're a neoliberal!"

This attitude is a mistake for three reasons.
One: "Neoliberalism" Is Too Vague a Term

Both Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul have been described as neoliberals by critics of neoliberalism — as have both Tony Blair and Donald Trump. But if your ideological terminology includes all of these people in the same category, your terminology isn't very useful.

Yes, it's true that in the mind of a die-hard Leninist, both Clinton and Paul would be considered members of a decadent bourgeoisie, devoted to capitalist imperialism.

Similarly, since neither Bill Clinton nor Ron Paul support Venezuela-like economic policies, they are both denounced as neoliberals by the hard-left advocates for "equality."

In reality, of course, many so-called neoliberals differ so completely on the particulars of policy, that to put them together in the same category is next to useless. If the definition of neoliberal is little more than "not a communist" then we need to look elsewhere for a better term.
Two: "Liberalism" (Without the "Neo") Is Better

While Americans — and too a lesser extent, Canadians — are often confused about the meaning of the term "liberal," many of the world's educated people are still acquainted with both the term and the ideological movement it describes.

In most of the world, liberalism has always been the ideology we continue to associate with the American Revolutionaries, the free-trade, anti-war Manchester school, and the French liberals like Frédéric Bastiat. It was also, of course, the ideology of the Austrian free-market economists like Ludwig von Mises and Carl Menger.

Historian Ralph Raico has defined this movement as such:

"Classical liberalism" is the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade. Up until around 1900, this ideology was generally known simply as liberalism.

The movement, in a recognizable form we might call "libertarianism" goes back at least as far as the Levellers of 17th century England. That movement was instrumental in introducing many of the political rights that were then outlined in the US Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

This same ideological tradition also influenced liberals in France, Switzerland, England, and even Poland. The free-market, free-trade, free-migration reforms that swept across Europe in the 19th-century were a product of a rapidly liberalizing Europe.

As with so many other ideological, movements, of course, liberalism has waxed and waned in influence. But it has never totally disappeared, in part because it is so successful at bringing economic prosperity wherever it is tried.

Although many today confuse liberalism with various types of conservatism, liberalism has always been distinct in that it has viewed individuals and civil society as capable of thriving without requiring a class of government-created and government-sustained elites.

Liberals oppose societies that are shaped, planned, guided, or coerced from above. They believe, in other words, in spontaneous order that grows out of countless, decentralized groups of households, individuals, businesses, and communities. While conservatism (like most authoritarian ideologies) takes the view that people are naturally lacking in the ability to govern themselves — and thus require "leadership" from politicians — liberals believe that people can be left alone to live their lives in peace. In this view, the only people who require coercion are violent criminals.
Three: Neoliberalism Is Often the Opposite of Liberalism

And yet, bizarrely, modern-day liberals are being saddled with the epithet of "neoliberal" although neoliberalism embraces so much of what liberalism rejects.

After all, we are told that organizations like the European Union, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization all are part and parcel of the "radical free market ideology" — to use Pearlstein's term — that is neoliberalism.

In truth, these institutions most closely associated with neoliberalism — which also include central banks like the Federal Reserve — stand in stark contrast to the laissez-faire world envisioned by the free-market liberals.

All of these global "neoliberal" organizations depend either on tax revenues, or on government-granted monopolies. They rely on various types of government meddling, manipulation, and coercion to accomplish their missions.

This stands in stark contrast to everything that liberals have stood for.

Indeed, Ludwig von Mises opposed organizations like these in his day, precisely because they were illiberal. as David Gordon notes:

For Mises, schemes for international organization were intended only as means to promote the free market. When Mises realized that in the statist climate of the day, these plans could not work, he for the most part abandoned them. In Omnipotent Government, e.g., he says: “Under present conditions an international body for foreign trade planning would be an assembly of the delegates of governments attached to the ideas of hyper-protectionism. It is an illusion to assume that such an authority would be in a position to contribute anything genuine or lasting to the promotion of foreign trade.”

Mises also devoted a sizable portion of his career to opposing central banks and central banking.

For critics of neoliberalism to now claim that neoliberalism is the ideology of radical laissez-faire, and that Mises was himself a neoliberal — as has been often claimed — ignores what the real ideology of laissez-faire has always been. Neoliberalism is really just a throwback to the mercantilism of old, in which government-controlled monopolies push state-sponsored agendas on everyone else. In other words, neoliberalism is exactly the thing liberalism has always attempted to destroy. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ave-liberalism

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

An interesting clip below by tucker carlson where he explores why the democrats are siding with the jewish neocons in wanting more war in syria and continued NATO membership

The democrats are attacking trump for wanting to pull the troops out of syria and for discussing the idea of leaving NATO. This feeds into their argument that trump is an agent of putin

In my experience of debating with progressives what usually happens is that they are not honest about their true intentions. They always hide their agenda behind an excuse or hide it behind faux-morality

So as the debate goes on the guy says that baltic countries want to be free and have liberal values. So really the reason the progressives HATE russia is because russia is upholding christian values

The western progressives (i'm loathe to call them 'liberals' as i think they have co-opted that term) want to push transgenderism, pedophilia, materialism, satanism, hi-tech takeover of our lives, war, mammonism and narcissism which are all at odds with russias christian values

The fake-left wants to demonise 'toxic masuclinity' ie male energy which when used properly in society= DISCIPLINE. Yes the dark flip side of masculinity when it is out of balance is oppressive violence but when channeled positively it is good for innovation, protection, self-sacrifice for the common good and also discipline and as we watch society fall apart it becomes clearer and clearer that this demonisation of men by the fake-left has been all about making men step back when what is needed is for men to step UP!

Men cannot step up however without the support of women which is why the cabal has used militant feminism to remove female support for discipline by painting men as an enemy of women

This suppression of the sacred masculine is seeing all kinds of acting out in society and the flourishment of a me, me, me culture

people have lost discipline, they have lost a sense of working for something greater than themselves and they have lost insight that comes from self-reflection which is all part of discipline

The various factions of disgruntled people who all have an axe to grind against society that the cabal has pulled together under the banner of the fake-left all HATE russia because in their eyes it epitomises the masculinity that they so despise

To them putin also embodies masculinity and trump too is despised because he is coming in like daddy to spank the naughty children and the naughty children want to be able to misbehave. Trump is coming in and saying some hard truths about what is sustainable for a society and what isn't and the progressives don't want to think in practical terms because they are all EMOTIONALITY

This is why the fake-left must always hide its irrationality behind faux-morality for example they don't despise russia because it wants to invade latvia. They HATE russia because to them it embodies masculine traits for example it wants to protect itself and its people

They don't argue that trump is working for putin because its true, they do it because that hate that trump is pushing back against the political correctness that they have been using to attack 'heteronormative society'. THATS why they hate him. Its got nothing to do with something rational. It has everything to do with their prejudice

Facebook has been accused of "pumping out fake news" after running political adverts claiming endangered animals were being threatened - by Brexit.

The social media giant has been paid hundreds of thousands of pounds by Britain’s two most prominent Remain campaign groups to stir up support for a second referendum.

Latest figures released by the Facebook show the two organisations - People’s Vote UK and Best for Britain - spent £373,587 on Facebook ads in the run up to the parliamentary vote on Theresa May’s defeated Brexit deal.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ng-endangered/

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

The Green Delusion is “being promoted as a kind of progressive beacon of a greener America, promising jobs and social justice for all on top of a shift away from fossil fuels. It’s a proposal largely driven by newcomers to politics and environmental activism (and supported, however tentatively, by several potential presidential candidates and members of the Democratic political establishment).”

Dems and progressives quite typically ignore the math. This green plan—actually a socialist boondoggle to push the Identity and intersectional agenda on the American people—will cost trillions.

No worries. The socialists have it figured out.

TY @rch371 The short answer to ‘how we will pay for’ the Green New Deal is easy. We’ll pay for it just as we pay for all else: Congress will authorize necessary spending, and Treasury will spend. This is how we do it – always has been, always will be. https://t.co/PkGUV86ep4

— Sherry_Reson (@Sherry_Reson) January 17, 2019

In other words, massive growth of the deficit and shifting the responsibility to pay for a humongous and largely ignored national debt over to the unborn and small children in an imaginative scheme that will keep the debt beast feeding on its victims well into the future.

Establishment Democrats will back this green delusion. Many have arrived at the conclusion that Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden are not the future representing the flip side of the one party arrangement. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is.

Let’s call the Green New Deal what is—a Trojan horse for the socialists.

Socialism—communism lite—is a great control mechanism. If you complain too loudly about brownouts, blackouts, the inability to pay for severely taxed gasoline (think of the Yellow Vests in France), food shortages, and dozens of necessities dependent on the current energy arrangement, you may be called out as a climate denier. This classification is one rung down from that of the holocaust denier.

Those times are coming—and sooner before later, especially as the wheels come off an artificially pumped up stock market.

I keep saying this and I will say it again. If the political arrangement in this country does not change—if the republic and the Constitution (or what’s left of both) are to survive—the wars must end and the monetary system taken out of the hands of international bankers and a predatory global elite.

I’m not seeing this happen. I am seeing millions of ill-informed, propagandized, and badly educated Americans—in history, geography, politics—either fully or partially buying into a delusional system that is teetering on the edge of economic and social disaster.

If the history of the 20th century shows anything it’s that people will go along with the prevailing political arrangement until such a time as there is a breakdown, economic failure, and social chaos. We’re not there yet. We are rapidly approaching that destination.

The socialists are ready to take over. Like FDR, they’re good at demanding sacrifice, and punishing those who reject the premise manmade carbon is responsible for an approaching climate apocalypse. It wasn’t a surprise when they wove this into existing leftist narratives, most prominently race-gender identity and wealth inequality (shorthand for taxation and redistribution to groups carved out by the state). https://www.davidicke.com/article/51...-deal-delusion

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Try to Figure Out Where Labour Ends and Likud Starts
January 20, 2019 / Gilad Atzmon

A few days before Christmas, Labour Cllr Richard Watts and the Islington Council, acting at the request of the UK Likud Herut Director, chose to stop me from playing with the Blockheads. The impoverished Council, in an odd interpretation of working for its citizens, hired two partners from one of London’s most expensive law firms to help them in their crusade against my saxophone.

Their action prompted hundreds of complaints and a petition of protest from almost 7000. Despite the backlash, another Labour councillor has stepped in to try to ruin my musical career. Rachel Eden has in the past attempted to interfere with my literature event at Reading Literary Festival, organised a protest against me without knowing who I was and what I stood for, and is on the Zionist We Believe in Israel list of 2016 General Election candidates who pledge their support for Israel.

Cllr. Eden furthered the campaign to ruin me financially for my political beliefs by sending the following email to the Progress Theatre in Reading:

Dear xxxx,
Hope you're well and enjoying the run up to Christmas...
Sorry to email you about something controversial but I suspect that you'd rather I let you know. (the comments in brackets are my own GA)

I just wanted to alert you that I am sure inadvertantly (sic) Progress has taken a booking from Gilead (sic) Atzmon. He's not a household name but he is very well known by the Jewish community as an anti-semite, last time he came to Reading he claimed that Jerusalem-ites doing mitzvot caused the Grenfell Tower tragedy:https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/a...tzvot-1.447012 (GA: If Mrs. Eden had actually bothered to read the JC article, she would have noticed that I emphasise that Jerusalem vs. Athens is not a Jew vs Gentile binary. I pointed out that tragedies like the Grenfell tower come about because in Jerusalem people are trained to follow patterns and regulations: as opposed to thinking authentically and ethically as in Athens.)

As you'll see from this story he was protested by a mix of Jewish and LGBT residents, he is also a holocaust 'skeptic' and Labour councillors including me. (GA: I am not a Holocaust ‘skeptic’ as I am not an historian, however, I support the idea that every event in the past must be subject to historical analysis and revision!)

(GA: Hope not Hate is a notorious Zionist operation and has been exposed as such many times in the past.)

All in all I am guessing you and the committee probably didn't know any of this as he is trying to portray himself as "just" a jazz musician, but I would assume he's not the sort of person you want associated with Progress Theatre.

Rachel
--

The promoters of the concert replied to Cllr Eden as follows: “Our focus is on – and our interest is in – the music, nothing else. We do not aim to provide a platform for people to express their personal views on any non-musical subject. We have not received complaints of offence being caused at any of our concerts in the fourteen years we have been promoting jazz, despite programming a wide variety of acts and individuals. In the case of Gilad Atzmon, we understand that he has never even been questioned by any law enforcement authority about the allegations to which you refer, let alone convicted.”

It would be a blessing for the kingdom if our politicians had the clarity of thinking, ethical stand and respect for free speech displayed by our musical promoters and venues. Apparently, despite Eden’s persistent harassment of the venue, the promoters held fast against her onslaught.

As expected, when it became clear that Cllr. Eden would not be able to stop my concert, the notorious ultra Zionist Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) in accord with its stated goal to ruin anyone it deems a threat to Zion, openly re-joined the effort to rid Britain of my saxophone.

Apparently, numerous promoters around the country have received threatening letters from Stephen Silverman, a ‘music teacher’ as well as The CAA’s ‘Director of Investigation and Enforcement.’ A charity is defined as “an organisation set up to provide help and raise money for those in need.” I wonder what it is that qualifies an organisation as charitable when instead of helping others it operates to investigate and ‘enforce’ rules of its own making.

Enforcement commissar Silverman’s email is a rehash of their usual list of misleading, misquoted and badly sourced accusations and ends with, what for them is an unusually polite declaration: “It would, of course, be inappropriate for us to attempt to dictate who appears at your venue, and that is not my intention. The purpose of this letter is merely to provide you and your venue with information of which you may be unaware.”

Naturally, Silverman does not actually mean his deferential words. Once a venue replies that it does not intend to accede to the demands of Silverman and his klan, Silverman sends a second letter accusing the venue of “taking side” with haters, in “dereliction of duty” to side with Jews. The email ends with a clear threatening note:

Thank you for your reply. On the basis of your response it is clear that, by failing to stand up to antisemitism, you have chosen to side with those who seek to stir up hatred towards this country’s Jewish community. Your willingness to turn a blind eye to the activities of this leading antisemite shames you, your board and your arts centre, and is nothing less than a dereliction of duty.

There is a vast amount of documented evidence, accumulated over many years, that bears witness to the extent of Gilad Atzmon’s antisemitism. He attempts to shield himself from the consequences of this with a bogus philosophy of his own devising that purports to be critical of ‘Jewishness’, Jewish politics and Jewish culture rather than of Jews. It is a paper-thin facade that crumbles under even the most cursory scrutiny.

This is someone who publicly told a Jewish man that he detested the Jew in hone (GA: actually, this was in reply to a tweet that “as a Jew” I should want to kill Arabs. The tweet was from vile hateful character @onepound1 who was subsequently banned from twitter for hate speech. I didn’t know that @onepound1 is indeed Jewish, perhaps Mr. Silverman is more familiar with this anonymous twitter user and his murderous intent?) stated that burning synagogues could be considered a rational act (GA: indeed, as are many violent actions in a war. They are rational not ethical and not desirable. The Guardian published my letter in that regard) and invited the Jewish people to apologise for being so hateful that the world has been forced to persecute them (GA: here’s the quote in context: “Instead of constantly blaming the Goyim for inflicting pain on Jews, it is time for Jews to look in the mirror and try to identify what it is in Jews and their culture that evokes so much fury. It may even be possible that some Jews would take this opportunity to apologise to the Gentiles around them for evoking all this anger.”). He repeats some of the same discredited antisemitic views about Jewish power that were employed by the Nazi regime to pave the way for the Holocaust, and he uses his blogs, videos and public talks to encourage others to share his hatred. (GA: noticeably Silverman doesn’t present a single hateful comment by me.) In 2012, he was disavowed by a group of prominent Palestinian writers and activists who refused to have anything further to do with his antisemitism. (GA: here he is telling you that a group of 20 Palestinian activists are more sensitive to accusations of antisemitism then they are in furthering their cause.)

We will endeavour to ensure that your actions, positive or negative, receive the attention that they deserve.

Kind regards

Stephen Silverman

Director of Investigations and Enforcement

Direct: 0330 822 XXXX extn 203

- -

As I point out above, Silverman’s accusations are misleading. However, threatening emails from this specific Jewish charity raise some serious concerns. In August, 2017, after the CAA and Silverman sent similar threatening notes to an Oxford bookshop that refused to acquiesce to their demands, a member of the audience was the victim of a vicious physical attack that left him with a severe eye injury. After the attack, audience members, some of whom were Jewish, responded with angry letters to the CAA, but the British ‘charitable’ organisation refused to take any responsibility for the attack.

Friday night’s concert at the Progress Theatre was a sold out success, in spite of Cllr Eden’s campaign and CAA’s threatening messages. Last night we performed at the Ropetackle Arts Centre which has received similar threatening emails from Silverman and one Simon Butler, a NYC ‘CAA’s volunteer.’

The Ropetackle Arts Centre responded to the threats as follows:

“The letter from Mr Silverman has been passed to me in my capacity as chairman of the charity which runs the Ropetackle Arts Centre.

We recently received a similar request from Simon Butler. After very careful consideration, we informed him that we were intending to go ahead with the concert. This remains our decision which we do not feel appropriate to explain or justify other than to point out that Gilad Atzmon has performed at our Centre on numerous previous occasion without any complaint.”

If the CAA wants to fight antisemitism for real they should consider ceasing their operation tomorrow morning. Their mean spirited attempt to ruin people financially reflects disastrously on them and anyone who is associated with their campaign. The more their operation and its methodology become known, the more likely the public is to believe that their bullying is supported by Jews in general. Such thoughts could lead to a real backlash which is a result antithetical to the goals of those of us who oppose all racism and violence.

the people who have most viciously attacked me when i've tried to speak about vaccines online have invariably been what the americans would call 'liberals'....everytime. Sure that's anecdotal evidence but i have spoken to a lot of people online across many platforms and its been my overwhelming experience

The pharmaceutical industry is largely run by Leftists, stunning new research finds… vaccine mandates, drugging of children, chemotherapy and more
January 28, 2019 by IWB
by: Vicki Batts

New research led by Crowdpac, a nonpartisan polling group, has taken a hard look at federal campaign contributions across a number of different industries. And as it turns out, Big Pharma is largely run by members of the Left-wing — as is the entertainment industry, the news media, academia, tech and other influential industries. Across the board, liberals are dominating some very powerful arenas, and often are virtually unchallenged by anyone else in their profession.

Ideological echo chambers exist not just on social media but across a variety of industries — it is no wonder leftist ideologies are now running amok. Take a look at Big Tech: As the Crowdpac data indicates, tech is largely a liberal industry. Some of the biggest tech companies right now are patting each other on the back for censoring conservatives as “hate speech.” They have no foil, and there are no conservative tech companies to take a stand against this blatant abuse of power.

The ex-UKIP leader lashed out at the BBC’s “editorial bias” for not broadcasting his latest anti-Brexit speech at the European Parliament wasn't shown, instead but airing comments by leading EU official Guy Verhofstadt. Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Mr Farage fired a broadside at the BBC for receiving grant funding under Horizon 2020, the EU framework programme which provides grants for research and development. He called on the BBC to “come clean” about its “cosy relationship" with Brussels.

Corbyn and McDonnell scramble to stop Labour imploding over Brexit saying they have NOT ruled out second referendum
By James Tapsfield, Political Editor, For Mailonline
Published: 09:54, 8 February 2019 | Updated: 09:56, 8 February 2019
Jeremy Corbyn and his allies today insisted they have not completely ruled out a second Brexit referendum as they scramble to stop Labour imploding. The party's civil war has escalated dramatically after the Labour leader tried to outflank Theresa May by offering to support a Norway-style deal with the EU. Mr Corbyn's own Eurosceptic credentials have also been highlighted by a 2009 video showing him condemning the 'European empire' and complaining that referendums should not be re-run [SELL OUT]. One ally of Mrs May last night predicted that a cross-party bid to delay Brexit would come back next week ‘but this time with a customs union attached.’ Shadow attorney general Shami Chakrabarti suggested Labour could allow free movement to continue, saying: ‘We are not an anti-immigration party. If we have to negotiate on free movement in order to get the objectives set out in that letter that is what we will do.’https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-Brexit.html

JACK DOYLE: How Corbyn's poisoned apple would kill the spirit of Brexit after the Labour leader's tawdry intervention letter to Theresa May
By Jack Doyle for the Daily Mail
Published: 00:07, 8 February 2019 | Updated: 00:53, 8 February 2019

On one level, Mr Corbyn is driving a wedge into the Tory Party. His demand for a customs union and ‘close alignment’ with the single market is exactly what a significant number of ‘soft Brexit’ Tories want. One, Nick Boles – an advocate of a ‘Norway-style’ half-in, half-out deal – welcomed the overture as a ‘big step to a cross-party compromise’. Mrs May will desperately try and resist swallowing Mr Corbyn’s poisoned apple. She still argues forcefully that a permanent customs union will make trade deals with non-EU countries all but impossible to strike after we leave. In addition, tying Britain close to the single market after Brexit would mean swallowing vast reams of EU law, without any influence over them. Downing Street officials also fear that in all likelihood, Brussels would demand continued free movement of labour as its price. And any outcome resembling Norway’s comes with vast annual contributions to the EU budget. Indeed put simply, how would such a deal come close to upholding the promise of the referendum of taking back control of Britain’s money, borders and laws?https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...it-Brexit.html

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Not Crazy at all! The real Democrat agenda unveiled: Murder the babies, demolish all buildings, ban guns, block the sun, kill free speech, ban all airplanes and declare a new UTOPIA
By PatriotRising -
February 9, 2019

With the release of “Green New Deal” plan authored by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (and endorsed by Kamala Harris, Corey Booker and other prominent Democrats), the real agenda of the Democrats has now become clear.

That agenda is best described as this: Murder the babies, demolish all buildings, block the sun, kill free speech, ban all airplanes and declare a new utopia.

The “Green New Deal” plan, covered in my podcast below, demands the following astonishing (insane) proposals now being pushed by Democrats:

Exterminate the air travel industry and end all air travel, crushing the entire tourism and hotel industry and making the military’s national defense impossible to achieve.
Demolishing ALL buildings in America (or refurbishing them) in order to rebuild them to be “eco-friendly.”
Constructing railroads across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans to connect world cities on different continents by rail.
Granting government benefits to all people who are “unwilling” to work. Yes, the Green New Deal quite literally says the “unwilling” should be given free money and endless entitlements from the government.
Slaughtering all cattle, nationwide, over the next 10 years and outlawing cattle ranching.
Eliminating all jobs related to fossil fuels energy, including transportation, energy exploration, geological science, combustion engines and more.

This “Green New Deal” is being pushed with a straight face by lunatic Leftists who, if they got their wish, would economically obliterate the United States of America. (Hint: That’s their goal, actually.) They also believe they are morally justified in their demands because they’ve all been brainwashed to believe that carbon dioxide is a poison — an insane, quack science conspiracy theory against chemistry — and that more liquid water in the oceans (instead of frozen ice) would somehow destroy the planet.
The “Green New Deal” would be economic suicide for America

It should be obvious to any thinking person at this point that outlawing fossil fuels in the next ten years would have apocalyptic effects on the United States, including (but not limited to) the following:

A near-total collapse of food production, since nearly all agriculture relies on diesel engines for farming, harvesting and transportation of food. Cue mass starvation, Venezuela style…
A massive increase in the consumption of fossil fuels as diesel-burning construction equipment is needed to destroy and then rebuilt tens of millions of homes and commercial buildings across the United States. According to current estimates, 30,000 buildings would need to be destroyed and rebuilt each day across America over the next ten years in order to achieve the Ocasio-Cortez “Green New Deal” goal. This is government genius at work: Destroying and then rebuilding millions of buildings, burning diesel fuel the whole time, then calling it “eco-friendly.”
A collapse of the air travel industry, tourism industry and hotel industry, displacing millions of works and causing widespread, across-the-board investment losses. But don’t worry, Ocasio-Cortez says the government will “guarantee” jobs for all people, including those who are “unwilling” to work.
A total collapse of nationwide pension funds as their investments in the stock market are wiped out by the economic implosion. With the energy industry wiped out, the food production industry flatlined, and air travel, tourism and hotels all but eliminated, the Ocasio-Cortez economy would mostly consist of the government paying people to destroy buildings and execute cows. This is the Green New Deal, in reality.

By the way, this insane agenda of total destruction and national suicide is bring protected and promoted by the evil tech giants like Twitter, Apple, Google and Facebook, all of which are now run by lunatic left-wing censors who silence any voice of reason while shielding Democrat lunacy from criticism or rational inquiry. In just the last few days, Twitter banned all Natural News accounts because I publicly criticized Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey for promoting a pump-and-dump cryptocurrency scam. So now Twitter silences people for exposing investment fraud, too.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is insane… but her insanity is shared by a shocking number of lunatic left-wing Democrats

Yes, Ocasio-Cortez is clinically insane. But her ideas — which are almost all rooted in communism and fascism — are shockingly popular among the drooling left-wing idiots who now run the tech giants, the media and the U.S. House of Representatives. If these people are allowed to gain power over the country, they will plunge America into an era of unprecedented human suffering, starvation and destitution.http://patriotrising.com/not-crazy-a...-a-new-utopia/

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Wherever the Clintons go and whoever they are close to often meet mysterious ends, often very strange suicides. The latest person to face this tragic end is Sabrina Bittencourt, an activist who exposed Bill Clinton’s “faith healer,” Joao Teixeira de Faria (John of God), as a child rapist and running a “sex slave farm.” Bittencourt was found dead over the weekend, just days after making the claims.

Largely, the media is silent over Bittencourt’s alleged suicide in her own home.

The Daily Mail, however, reported:

Sabrina Bittencourt, 38, died at her home in Barcelona just days after accusing John of God – real name Joao Teixeira de Faria – of running a ‘sex slave farm’.

She claimed young girls were held captive in a farming operation which exported babies on the black market.

The women would be murdered after ten years of having babies in the alleged scheme run by the 77-year-old celebrity faith healer, who was arrested last year after hundreds of women accused him of abuse, she said.

Ms Bittencourt left Brazil and was forced to live under protection after receiving death threats.

Her eldest son Gabriel Baum confirmed her death, writing on Facebook: ‘She took the last step so that we could live. They killed my mother.’